YMMV. I never quite connected with Hawke as I did the Warden or the Inquisitor (both who I feel are "my" characters), but I still felt I managed to play several different characters during the playthroughs I did. I think a balance has to be struck between allowing the player to do whatever they please and being able to tell a good story. If everyone can do everything then everything either has to be meaningful (which would be costly) or everything has to be meaningless (which is bad). But that's just my opinion, and personally I'm mostly pleased with the stories Bioware tell.
But like I said, YMMV.
I'm fine with meaningless as long as its free. Life is meaningless by its own nature, we're nothing in the universe (or multiverse) or the tides of time , I have no dreams of affecting anything except in my own head, that is what life is, a dream that fades in few years. Well you can share it others and make it last for "eternity" with godlike feats but still, nothing but a dream. Yeah, but I get it that human people like having importance so there you go...
Unless you're making a text game or something, I really don't think you're ever going to get a CRPG that's as open ended as a table top campaign. There's not enough time or money to turn something like that into a reality with the care and detail most people want to see these days.
I can appreciate where you're coming from. For example, I think that Mass Effect essentially turned to garbage the moment we were railroaded into working for Cerberus without being given the option to take our ball and our awesome spaceship and go back to the alliance. Thankfully, I'm ok with the scenarios that the DA people have thrust us into thus far, and I like the games that Bioware is making these days.
I did a game in 2003, in RPG Maker 2000, where you had 6 completely different paths to take, I essentially did 6 games into one, happening in the same playthrough from start to end, each one almost 40 hours. That's where my "crazy ideas" came from... a single 19 year old person could do it... how is it that EA can't?
Thing is focus. RPG is becoming more and more their story (and most people here love their stories) and less about our stories. Also if you do a game with graphics like a hundred times worse than Inquisition do you realize how much money you will have to invest in options?
But I DO REALIZE it is impossible, since they would sell a few thousand copies and bankrupt right away. Thus I am (was) happy with games like DAO, they were the closest possible to having possibilities, options, choices outside of my dreamworld. Now we have inquisition... I'm sorry people think you have choices in Inquisition, being the Inquisitor is all the choice you have. I doesn't matter if I do save the world or condemn it, I'm a ****** Inquisitior, I am pure ****, I'm the leader of an organization, it means I am the thing I despise the most. Even if I go the way of the people with Iron Bull or Sera, or the companions always saying how I'm different, how I'm one of the people and not "the Inquisitor", it doesn't matter, I am the pure **** leader of a pure **** organization, I am, no matter what I do in this game pure ****.
In other games it bothers me less since I'm not forced to be pure ****, I'm forced to be cool thing. Roles... the champion of kirkwall was the most human and the one that pleased me the most. If I was to be some Bioware protagonist that would DEFFINETLY be Hawke. I can see myself fighting the world for personal reason and getting carried not because of peace or power but because the people I love.
Even BG aren't out of this critic, I HATE being baalspawn or anything like that
Retour en haut
yet...... people still mourn for it. People swear by it. But it probably had the worse graphics for its time...
